ArticleBritish journal of cancer2026
A digital quality measure for emergency presentation of pancreatic cancer.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver half of patients with pancreatic cancer experience an emergency cancer diagnosis, but tools for large-scale study are lacking. Towards this end, we developed a digital quality measure (dQM) to automate the detection of pancreatic cancer emergency presentations (EPs).
methodsA dQM for pancreatic cancer EPs was developed within the U.S. Veterans Affairs health care system. Multivariable regression models were used to study the associations between EPs and cancer outcomes. Records of EP cases were manually reviewed to identify missed opportunities in diagnosis.
resultsThe dQM had a positive predictive value of 86.4% (95% CI 80.0-92.8) for accurately identifying EPs among patients with pancreatic cancer. Among 4415 pancreatic cancer patients, 60.9% were identified as EPs by the measure. Patients with EPs had more advanced-stage disease (adjusted OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.20-1.59) and higher mortality (adjusted HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.51-1.77). Nearly one in five EP cases had missed opportunities in diagnosis.
conclusionsOur dQM had strong performance characteristics for identifying pancreatic cancer EPs, which were independently associated with worse patient outcomes. A notable subset of cases was potentially avoidable. The dQM is a promising strategy for health care systems to identify and measure EPs for quality improvement initiatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.